Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To access our archive, please log in or register now and read two articles from our archive every month for free. For unlimited access to our archive, as well as to the unrivaled analysis of PS On Point, subscribe now.

Michael Spence, a Nobel laureate in economics, is Professor of Economics at NYU’s Stern School of Business, Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, Advisory Board Co-Chair of the Asia Global Institute in Hong Kong, and Chair of the World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council on New Growth Models. He was the chairman of the independent Commission on Growth and Development, an international body that from 2006-2010 analyzed opportunities for global economic growth, and is the author of The Next Convergence – The Future of Economic Growth in a Multispeed World.

This is a very interesting article. However, one may reasonably question the merits of its inferences based on a broad interpretation of geopolitical dimensions. Last year, China's defense spending rose 12.2% to $130bn. The country renovating its military capacity by substantial investment in hi-tech equipment expanding its space-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, navigation, meteorological and communications satellite constellations, modern submarines and stealth jets It has also been investing in naval forces, including an aircraft carrier.

In his June, 2011 speech, the then secretary of defence Robert Gates referred to the declining economic power of the US and its stretched military resources; “No doubt, fighting two protracted and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has strained the US military’s ground forces, and worn out the patience and appetite of the American people for similar interventions in the future. On the domestic front, the United States is emerging slowly from a serious recession with huge budget deficits and growing debt that is putting new scrutiny and downward pressure on the US defense budget ,” he stated, but he also made it clear that US is committed to a “significant growth in the breadth and intensity of US engagement in Asia.” This increased military deployment would establish a “defense posture across the Asia Pacific that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable. A posture that maintains our presence in Northeast Asia while enhancing our presence in Southeast Asia and into the Indian Ocean.”

Many analysts find the geopolitical questions of territory and military power a cause for concern. This is why there is so much emphasis on the need for an urgent rethinking of the world order and global governance: trade liberalization, nuclear nonproliferation, and so on in order to construct a non-zero-sum gain in international relations. Michael Spence is correct in suggesting that “China’s policymakers have long time horizons,” and that they “surely want international recognition of their country’s global stature. But they also want China’s rise to high-income status to occur in a way that is – and that is perceived to be – beneficial to its neighbors and the world.” Perhaps this is why in November 2012 they initiated talks with the 16-country Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which brings the 10 ASEAN countries together with India, South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. And then perhaps not! Since it is interesting that the US is not included in the list, which maybe an indication that this is a response to the US led Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

Of course, one needs to add into this mixture the rivalry between “China and India”, “China and Russia”, and “China and Japan”. For example, the extent of the first rivalry is evident along a 2,000-kilometre-long border in Nepal, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi sees it as a fellow Hindu-majority nation and as an integral part of India’s regional sphere of influence in South Asia. As for the second rivalry it appears that Chinese are trying to turn it into a win-win situation. For instance, in May 2014, China National Petroleum Corporation and Russia’s Gazprom signed a deal to deliver 38 billion cubic meters of Eastern Siberia natural gas to Northeast China over a period of 30 years and at a cost of U.S.$400 billion dollars. Russia and China announced a follow-up deal that increases the value of the contract to perhaps $725 billion in which some 30 bcm would be delivered from Western Siberian gas fields to China’s pipelines. Currently, these fields export to Western Europe.

As for China- Japan rivalry the evidence is the East China Sea tensions between them ever since after a 2010 ‘trawler incident’, and the move by China’s to establish full time maritime patrols in the vicinity of the contested islets, compounded by the occasional air patrol and even a Chinese drone sortie. Then there is the risk of a flare up in the conflict in the South China Sea where China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines have competing territorial and jurisdictional claims, particularly over rights to exploit the region's possibly extensive reserves of oil and gas. Freedom of navigation in the region is also a contentious issue, especially between the United States and China over the right of U.S. military vessels to operate in China's two-hundred-mile exclusive economic zone.

According to the US military report to the congress, “the people’s republic of China continues to pursue a long-term, comprehensive military modernization program designed to improve the capacity of its armed forces to fight and win short "duration, high-intensity regional contingencies. Preparing for potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait, which includes deterring or defeating third-party intervention, remains the focus and primary driver of China’s military investment. However, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) also is placing emphasis on preparing for contingencies other than Taiwan, including potential contingencies in the South and East China Seas.”

To sum up, one may realise that there is a possibility that China one day sees the wisdom in Yogi Berra’s advice: 'When you come to the fork in the road, take it!'

China is a partner of EU & Russia. Now bailing out Greece will create a furor among EU nations not much interest in China.Greece has to bear the burnt of its tragedy, mismanagement of economy. And so far China hasn't evince any intention of being generous esp.it has been logger heading in the south China Sea not willing to leave am inch to its small neighbours.